<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Practical SEO Truths We All Seem to Forget	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/seo-truths.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/seo-truths.html?utm_source=feed&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=feed</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s Search and Social Media Authority</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 15:21:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Erwin		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/seo-truths.html/comment-page-1#comment-225338</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Erwin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=29315#comment-225338</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I think the biggest problem is that people/SEOers/companies have been doing SEO according to the current version of the algorithm. This is of course fine for people who just want to rank given how the algorithm is looking at a particular point in time. Also, one of the biggest problems is that the Google algorithm sometimes change what&#039;s considered quality. The rules of the game is constantly changing. However, I think one of the best ways to be sure about quality is if you would be proud to show a certain backlink or content to your relatives/friends/boss etc. That would be an OK benchmark for quality.

It was an interesting read and I think this is what many SEOers forget - being too stuck in the technical aspect of SEO.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the biggest problem is that people/SEOers/companies have been doing SEO according to the current version of the algorithm. This is of course fine for people who just want to rank given how the algorithm is looking at a particular point in time. Also, one of the biggest problems is that the Google algorithm sometimes change what&#8217;s considered quality. The rules of the game is constantly changing. However, I think one of the best ways to be sure about quality is if you would be proud to show a certain backlink or content to your relatives/friends/boss etc. That would be an OK benchmark for quality.</p>
<p>It was an interesting read and I think this is what many SEOers forget &#8211; being too stuck in the technical aspect of SEO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mike Dawson		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/seo-truths.html/comment-page-1#comment-225313</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Dawson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:57:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=29315#comment-225313</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Writing quality is easier said than done, but I totally agree: Quality over quantity always! I&#039;d rather write one well-written and well-thought-out post every week, rather than force myself to write every day just for the sake of it. In addition, from what I&#039;ve seen, good posts give you a higher chance of people linking back to you, and sharing your content on social mediums.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Writing quality is easier said than done, but I totally agree: Quality over quantity always! I&#8217;d rather write one well-written and well-thought-out post every week, rather than force myself to write every day just for the sake of it. In addition, from what I&#8217;ve seen, good posts give you a higher chance of people linking back to you, and sharing your content on social mediums.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
